Re: Socialism & Libertarianism

Ian Goddard (
Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:26:52 -0500

At 12:04 AM 10/30/98 +1300, J. Maxwell Legg wrote:

>Ian, what seems evident here is that argument by selective definition is
>not enough and cannot persuade parties. In this thread, for example,
>others would say that politics is about forging and changing coalitions
>and that this definition seems to negate the ability of any individual
>from having or creating political power without the involvement of
>others, as you implied.
>There is this problem with general discourse in a way that likely even a
>Platonist would agree that written language is about not being able to
>come to agreement and in fact is more about missing perspectives. What I
>would hope eventually to see is a collective internet rendering of
>presentations that is something even bolder than what can do.
>I'd like to eventually see an elevation of subject matter on the basis
>of subjective evaluations of features where, by using say e.g., floating
>radio buttons in a sidebar to the subject area, to enable a scoring of
>features so that neural net patterns and/or markov-like chains could be
>developed and forever remain open to revision. Such an eventual global
>valuation of everything via the net is what I foresee. Because my
>software development is in this field, this is my expectation of
>libertarian socialism.

IAN: I certainly believe that libertarianism is the real "socialism" where we define socialism as a system that most effectively meets social needs, and a system directed by the people (a supply and demand system), whereas what we call socialism is directed by elite planners (control and command).

Visit Ian Williams Goddard -------->

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with the idea from the beginning."

                 Max Plank - Nobel physicist